Weekly Post 17: Courtcase
- Shrinidhi Joshi
- Jan 24, 2016
- 2 min read

This thursday, I got invited to watch my mentor testify during a hearing for a murder trial at the Dallas County Courthouse. Although I wasn't able to hear my mentor testify specifically, I was able to listen to the expert testimony of the defense's Forensic Psychologist. Both Dr. Dunn and the opposing sides Forensic Psychologist had similar testimonies because they agreed on the mental condition of the defendant.
It was especially interesting to see how experts testify in a legal setting and how they explain their personal opinion. Anyone who has any legal knowledge could pick out the reasons behind certain questions the attorneys asked. For example, when the medical examiner first took the stand, the prosecution started off by laying a foundation for the jury. For those who don't have much legal knowledge, laying foundation is absolutely neccassary when introducing an expert witness. To lay a foundation, counsel must establish the credentials, knowledge, and experience the witness has. What education do you have? Where did you complete your residency?Where do you currently work? How long have you had that position? What does your job entail? ETC. They also must establish the relevance of an witness to a case. For example, a counsel must hillight if the medical examiner is "aware of the incident that took place on (month/day/year) and how they were "called to the scene of the incident on the morning of ( month/day/ year)." By doing this, the counsel is protecting themselves from being objected to for a lack of foundation. It also allows for hearsay, which is the report of another person's words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law. Additionally, opinions become admissible, which is not allowed for other witnesses. After an individual is proven to be a expert, they can then present their opinion as qualified and reliable since it is their 'expert opinion.' I also noticed that the defense asked leading questions during their direct examination which is objectionable. The only reason I noticed these was because of my year in mock trial and hundreds of hours volunteering in courts. It was really neat to understand what was going on and the reasons behind everything without being told. It allowed me to connect previous knowledge to new experiences! I reccomend anyone interested in law to go sit in on trials every know in there to observe ans see what you can pick up on! Trials are open courts so you can walk into courtrooms at any moment and take a seat! I will specifically write about the forensic psychologist's and Dr. Dunn's testimony in my next post!
~Shrinidhi Joshi
Comments